Beyond Babel? An Ecumenical Reflection on Magnifica Humanitas

A provisional personal response from the County Ecumenical Officer to Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical from an ecumenical perspective

8-Minute Read

I should begin with a confession.  At the time of writing, I have not yet had sufficient opportunity to absorb every aspect of Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas.  Like many people, I have read it with interest, reflected on some of its themes, and followed some of the early commentary.  However, I suspect that this is one of those documents whose significance will emerge more clearly over time and through repeated reading.

What follows, therefore, is not a comprehensive analysis.  It is my provisional personal reaction as a Christian committed to the pursuit of Christian unity.

First a bit about the encyclical.  Magnifica Humanitas (2026) by Pope Leo XIV seeks to address the challenges posed by artificial intelligence (AI), digital technologies, robotics, surveillance capitalism, technological power, and the changing nature of work.  It explicitly commemorates the 135th anniversary of Rerum Novarum (1891) by Pope Leo XIII which was the foundational social encyclical of modern Catholic Social Teaching.  Rerum Novarum is important background as this was the encyclical that sought to respond to the 19th century social upheaval caused by industrialisation, the exploitation of workers, the concentration of wealth, and the rise of socialism.  

The current Pope’s encyclical seeks to apply the principles of Catholic Social Teaching to the digital age.  Many commentators have, understandably, focused on the document’s treatment of artificial intelligence, digital technologies and the ethical challenges posed by rapid technological change.  Others have highlighted its connection with the encyclical Rerum Novarum.  Both observations are important.  Nevertheless, as I read Magnifica Humanitas, I found myself drawn to the clear conclusion that this encyclical is not primarily about modern technology it is, in fact, all about humanity and our ability to flourish.

Although this insight is perhaps unsurprising - it is reflected in the very title Magnificent Humanity - it is easy for discussions about AI to overshadow the document’s deeper concern with the human person.  If we keep our attention fixed on humanity rather than technology alone, I believe the encyclical begins to reveal what may be the opportunity for a renewed ecumenical witness. 

I’m the type of Catholic (if there is a type) who is a big fan of the Second Vatican Council.  One of its enduring insights was the encouragement for Christians to read the “signs of the times”.  It said that every generation faces developments that force believers to ask anew what faithful discipleship requires.  The Industrial Revolution was one such moment.  It transformed patterns of work, family life and social organisation.  Churches could not ignore the resulting questions of poverty, exploitation and justice. 

It is important to say that Vatican II wasn’t just concerned with what happened in the past, in the early 1960s they were also grappling with the rise of automation, mass media, and intense global economic interconnectedness (which they termed socialisation). They warned that while this modern technological progress generated an immense sense of human power, it paradoxically created “new forms of human poverty and marginalisation”.  The legacy of the industrial revolution - where in effect human capital was subordinated to financial profit - was repeating itself, but this time on a highly technical and globalised scale.

There is no doubt that in our day, modern technology represents a similar moment for our own generation.  Increasingly, algorithms shape the information people receive, machines perform tasks once thought uniquely human, and digital systems influence decision-making, communication and employment.  Some predict extraordinary benefits; others understandably fear unprecedented risks.  Whatever position one takes, it is difficult to deny that profound changes are underway and even accelerating.

Beneath the discussion about AI, machines and software, however, lies the far older and much more fundamental question - what does it mean to be human?  That question strikes me as fundamentally theological and philosophical, rather than technological.  

Indeed, one of the things I find most interesting from an ecumenical perspective is that Christians clearly possess greater agreement about the nature of humanity, than they do about many aspects of ecclesiology.  Although, we continue to have important disagreements concerning ministry, authority, sacraments and church structures, across our traditions, nevertheless, there exists a broad consensus concerning the dignity of the human person.

Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, Pentecostals, Reformed Christians, Quakers, Salvationists, and many others, continue to affirm that every human being is created in the image of God.  We affirm that humans possess inherent worth that cannot be reduced to economic value or social usefulness.  That human beings are relational creatures called into communion with God and neighbour.  And that love, responsibility, freedom, compassion and moral agency matter for human flourishing.

In short, Christians may disagree about certain aspects of the Church, but we agree deeply about what it means to be human.  This is why Magnifica Humanitas will resonate beyond specifically Catholic circles, as it raises questions that belong to the whole Christian family.

To me, this thought is even more interesting in the context of last year’s 1700th anniversary of the Council of Nicaea, which the majority of Christians around the world have been commemorating.  At first glance, Nicaea and artificial intelligence seem worlds apart: one concerned the identity of Christ, the other concerns emerging technologies.  However, I believe that the connection is much closer than it first appears.  The early Church wrestled with the question: Who is Jesus Christ?  Our own age increasingly wrestles with another question: What is a human being? 

The Christian tradition, crucially for me, has always attempted to hold these two questions as inseparable.  The Church Fathers repeatedly taught that Christ reveals not only God to humanity but humanity to itself.  The famous words attributed to St Irenaeus, that: “the glory of God is a human being fully alive” continue to resonate precisely because they connect divine purpose with authentic human flourishing.  Consequently, when we in contemporary society struggle to define personhood, freedom, consciousness or dignity, Christians already possess resources that can contribute meaningfully to this challenge.  Importantly, these resources do not belong exclusively to one denomination - they form part of the common inheritance of Christian faith.

One aspect of Magnifica Humanitas that particularly caught my attention is Leo’s use of the biblical contrast between Babel and Jerusalem.  Babel represents humanity’s temptation toward self-sufficiency, control and the illusion that technical power can solve every problem.  Jerusalem represents cooperation, shared responsibility and the patient rebuilding of community.  In the biblical account, different people contribute different gifts toward a common purpose.

Reflecting on this imagery, I cannot help pointing out the ecumenical implications.  For me, the tragedy of Christian division is that it has often resembled Babel.  Historically, Christians have hardened boundaries between them, and far too often spoken past one another, rather than with one another.  Genuine modern ecumenism attempts to seek something different.  Rather than demanding uniformity, it aims to foster collaboration and unity while (of course) respecting diversity and distinctions.

Perhaps the same principle applies to the challenges of the digital age.  What I mean by this is that no single church possesses all the answers and, certainly, no denomination alone can shape the moral culture emerging around artificial intelligence.  What Christians can best do together, however, are to contribute wisdom, discernment and moral vision rooted in a shared belief in human dignity.

If this is right, then I wonder whether the most significant Christian response to artificial intelligence may not be technological at all.  Sure, the Church can better utilise AI and other technology in support of its witness and mission.  Christians will also rightly continue debating regulation, ethics and public policy around modern technology and its implications.  I have no doubt that those discussions matter greatly.  However, for me at least, the distinctive contribution of the Church may ultimately be the witness of communities that embody what machines cannot replicate.

In other words, although a machine can process information, it cannot genuinely love.  While it may simulate empathy, it is incapable of genuine concern expressed through charity and compassion.  It can certainly generate and replicate words at phenomenal speed, but it cannot become present as a loving neighbour in genuine human engagement.  The Christian life, however, has always centred itself upon presence; namely, praying together, visiting the sick, comforting the bereaved, welcoming strangers, supporting families and building communities of belonging.  

Such activities may appear ordinary to many, but in reality, they reveal something unique and profound about the nature of humanity itself.  In an increasingly digital world, I anticipate that these practices will become even more important by reminding us that human flourishing fundamentally depends upon relationships, communion and presence, rather than mere connectivity, simple communication, and efficiency.

It is for this reason, that my initial impression is that Magnifica Humanitas offers all Christians an unexpected ecumenical opportunity.  It invites us to think together about what it means to remain authentically human in a rapidly changing world.  It challenges us to defend human dignity, not as Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, Pentecostals, Free Church, and so forth, all acting separately, but as brothers and sisters in Christ bearing common witness and service.

In Magnifica Humanitas, the fundamental question before us is not whether technology will continue to advance.  It undoubtedly will.  The deeper question is whether humanity will remain sufficiently wise to use that power in ways that honour the dignity of every person.

That is a question which concerns all Christians across all our different traditions. And perhaps, just perhaps, it is one that we are better placed to answer together than apart.

Click to download a pdf copy of Magnifica Humanitas

Concept and article by Dr Ian Watson, County Ecumenical Officer for Norfolk and Waveney.
Image generated by OpenAI